5. For if we have been ingrafted, etc. He strengthens in plainer words the argument he has already stated; for the similitude which he mentions leaves now nothing
doubtful, inasmuch as grafting designates not only a conformity of example,
but a secret union, by which we are joined to him; so that he, reviving us by his Spirit, transfers his own virtue to
us. Hence as the graft has the same life or death in common with the tree into which it is ingrafted, so it is reasonable
that we should be partakers of the life no less than of the death of Christ; for if we are ingrafted according to the likeness
of Christ’s death, which was not without a resurrection, then our death shall not be without a resurrection. But the words
admit of
a twofold explanation, — either that we are ingrafted in Christ into the likeness of his death, or, that we are simply
ingrafted in its likeness. The first reading would require the Greek dative ὁμοιώματι, to be understood as pointing out the manner; nor do I deny but that it has a fuller meaning: but as the other harmonizes
more with simplicity of expression, I have preferred it; though it signifies
but little, as both come to the same meaning. Chrysostom thought that Paul used the expression, “likeness of death,” for death, as he says in another place, “being made in the likeness
of men.” But it seems to me that there is something more significant in the expression; for it not only serves to intimate
a resurrection, but it seems also to indicate this — that we die not like Christ a natural death, but that there
is a similarity between our and his death; for as he by death died in the flesh, which he had assumed from us, so we also
die in ourselves, that we may live in him. It is not then the same, but a similar death; for we are to notice the connection
between the death of our present life and spiritual renovation.

Ingrafted, etc. There is great force in this word, and it clearly shows, that the Apostle does not exhort, but rather teach us what benefit
we derive from Christ; for he requires nothing from us, which is to be done by our attention and diligence, but speaks of
the grafting made by the hand of God. But there is no
reason why you should seek to apply the metaphor or comparison in every particular; for between the grafting of trees,
and this which is spiritual, a disparity will soon meet us: in the former the graft draws its aliment from the root, but retains
its own nature in the fruit; but in the latter not only we derive the vigor and nourishment of life from Christ, but we also
pass from our own to his nature. The Apostle, however, meant to express nothing else but the efficacy of the death of Christ,
which manifests itself in putting to death our flesh, and also the efficacy of his resurrection, in renewing within us
a spiritual nature.
187187 The word σύμφυτοι, is rendered insititii by Calvin, and the same by Erasmus, Pareus, and Hammond. The Vulgate has “complantati — planted together; Beza, “cum eo plantati coaluimus — being planted with him we
grow together;” Doddridge, “grow together;” and Macknight, “planted together.” The word properly means either to grow together, or to be born together; and φύω never means to graft.
It is only found here; and it is applied by the Septuagint, in Zechariah 11:2, to a forest growing together. The verb συμφύω is once used in Luke 8:7, and refers to the thorns which sprang up with the corn. It occurs as a participle in the same sense in the Wisdom of Solomon, 13:13. It appears from Wolfius that the word is used by Greek authors in a sense not strictly literal, to express congeniality, conjoining, union, as the
sameness of disposition, or the joining together of a dismembered limb, or, as Grotius says, the union of
friendship. It might be so taken here, and the verse might be thus rendered, — For if we have been united (or, connected) by a similarity to his death, we shall certainly be also united by a similarity to his resurrection. The genitive case here may be regarded as that of the object, as the love of God means sometimes love to God. Evidently the
truth intended to be conveyed is, that as the Christian’s death to sin bears likeness to Christ’s death, so his rising to
a spiritual life is certain to bear a similar likeness to Christ’s resurrection. Then in the following verses this is more
fully explained. “The Apostle,” says Beza, “uses the future tense, ‘we shall be,’ because we are not as yet wholly dead, or wholly risen, but are daily emerging.”
But the future here, as Stuart remarks, may be considered as expressing what is to follow the death previously mentioned, or as designating an obligation, as in
Matthew 4:10; Luke 3:10, 12, 14; or a certainty as to the result. — Ed.

6. That our old man, etc. The old man, as the Old Testament is so called with reference to the New; for he begins to be old, when he is by degrees
destroyed by a commencing regeneration. But what he means is the
whole nature which we bring from the womb, and which is so incapable of the kingdom of God, that it must so far die as
we are renewed to real life. This old man, he says, is fastened to the cross of Christ, for by its power he is slain: and
he expressly referred to the cross, that he might more distinctly show, that we cannot be otherwise put to death than by partaking
of his death. For I do not agree with those who think that he used the word crucified, rather than dead, because he still
lives, and is in some respects vigorous. It is indeed a correct sentiment, but not suitable to this passage. The body of sin, which he afterwards mentions, does not mean flesh and bones, but the corrupted mass; for man, left to his own nature, is
a mass made up of sin.
188188 It is thought by Pareus and others, that “body” is here assigned to “sin,” in allusion to the crucifixion that is mentioned, as a body in that case
is fixed to the cross, and that it means the whole congeries, or, as Calvin calls it, the whole mass of sins, such as pride,
passion, lust, etc. But the reason for using the word “body,” is more probably this, because he called innate sin, man — “the
old man;” and what
properly belongs to man is a body. The “body of sin” is a Hebraism, and signifies a sinful body. It has no special reference
to the material body, as Origen thought. The “man” here is to be taken in a spiritual sense, as one who has a mind, reason, and affections: therefore the
body which belongs to him must be of the same character: it is the whole of what appertains to “the old man,” as he is corrupt
and sinful, the whole of what is earthly, wicked, and depraved
in him. It is the sinful body of the old man. — Ed.

He points out the end for which this destruction is effected, when he says, so that we may no longer serve sin. It hence follows, that as long as we are children of Adam, and nothing more than men, we are in bondage to sin, that we
can do nothing else but sin; but that being grafted in Christ, we are delivered from this miserable
thraldom; not that we immediately cease entirely to sin, but that we become at last victorious in the contest.

187 The word σύμφυτοι, is rendered insititii by Calvin, and the same by Erasmus, Pareus, and Hammond. The Vulgate has “complantati — planted together; Beza, “cum eo plantati coaluimus — being planted with him we
grow together;” Doddridge, “grow together;” and Macknight, “planted together.” The word properly means either to grow together, or to be born together; and φύω never means to graft.
It is only found here; and it is applied by the Septuagint, in Zechariah 11:2, to a forest growing together. The verb συμφύω is once used in Luke 8:7, and refers to the thorns which sprang up with the corn. It occurs as a participle in the same sense in the Wisdom of Solomon, 13:13. It appears from Wolfius that the word is used by Greek authors in a sense not strictly literal, to express congeniality, conjoining, union, as the
sameness of disposition, or the joining together of a dismembered limb, or, as Grotius says, the union of
friendship. It might be so taken here, and the verse might be thus rendered, — For if we have been united (or, connected) by a similarity to his death, we shall certainly be also united by a similarity to his resurrection. The genitive case here may be regarded as that of the object, as the love of God means sometimes love to God. Evidently the
truth intended to be conveyed is, that as the Christian’s death to sin bears likeness to Christ’s death, so his rising to
a spiritual life is certain to bear a similar likeness to Christ’s resurrection. Then in the following verses this is more
fully explained. “The Apostle,” says Beza, “uses the future tense, ‘we shall be,’ because we are not as yet wholly dead, or wholly risen, but are daily emerging.”
But the future here, as Stuart remarks, may be considered as expressing what is to follow the death previously mentioned, or as designating an obligation, as in
Matthew 4:10; Luke 3:10, 12, 14; or a certainty as to the result. — Ed.

188 It is thought by Pareus and others, that “body” is here assigned to “sin,” in allusion to the crucifixion that is mentioned, as a body in that case
is fixed to the cross, and that it means the whole congeries, or, as Calvin calls it, the whole mass of sins, such as pride,
passion, lust, etc. But the reason for using the word “body,” is more probably this, because he called innate sin, man — “the
old man;” and what
properly belongs to man is a body. The “body of sin” is a Hebraism, and signifies a sinful body. It has no special reference
to the material body, as Origen thought. The “man” here is to be taken in a spiritual sense, as one who has a mind, reason, and affections: therefore the
body which belongs to him must be of the same character: it is the whole of what appertains to “the old man,” as he is corrupt
and sinful, the whole of what is earthly, wicked, and depraved
in him. It is the sinful body of the old man. — Ed.